Murphy Now Leads By 167 Votes In NY-20
The latest state score in NY-20 shows Democratic candidate Scott Murphy ahead of Republican Jim Tedisco by 167 votes, a margin of 50.05%-49.95%, up from an 86-vote lead at the close of business yesterday -- making it appear more likely than not that Murphy will be the winner when all is said and done.
The big question now is how the roughly 1,200 challenged absentee ballot envelopes will play out, as they are currently being kept out of the count -- including the vote of U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. The ruling yesterday by Judge James V. Brands means that the vast majority of these challenges will be rejected out of hand, and the envelopes will be opened and the votes counted.
The numbers from Columbia County, for example, show that there have been 249 ballots challenged by the Tedisco campaign, compared to only 22 from Murphy. There are 740 challenges in the Tedisco stronghold of Saratoga County, but it's not been publicly disclosed what the breakdown is of who challenged how many ballots.
Overall, it seems like more ballots were challenged by the Tedisco camp across the district than were challenged by Murphy. And since a basic assumption is that a ballot that gets challenged is believed to be a vote for the other guy, this would mean that Murphy could gain a little bit when the votes are counted, assuming that more ballots were indeed challenged by Tedisco.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Nobody knows (or them what knows, ain't tellin'!), but I bet the worst these challenges could amount to be would basically be a wash for Murphy, i.e., still 150+ votes in the lead.
April 16, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Now that we have real numbers to look at from Saratoga and Washington, things are really starting to look good for Murphy.
Columbia, Dutchess, and Warren just reported more; which is where the 86 to, now, 167 Murphy lead came from. Those are three Murphy counties. We should be able to expect more from these and other Murphy counties. They still have outstanding absentee ballots to count.
Plus, by my count, except for challenges, the Tedisco counties are basically done. Maybe just a tiny bit more to come out of Tedisco counties. But nothing significant. Maybe some outstanding military absentees or the like.
We also have a couple of judicial decisions that came from Judge Brands yesterday that indicate he will confirm and support the rule of law in these cases. I had my doubts. You never know. Given his background. If the rule of law is supported, those decisions can't help but go Murphy's way. Which they are.
So, its looking very, very good indeed for Murphy.
Tedisco probably will not concede any time soon. But he should. What is the point now?
I mean, unless we wind up on Bizarro Earth within the next few days, its over.
April 16, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, so knock on wood a gazillion times, but it really does look like the good guys are going to win this and Minnesota. Damn!!
April 16, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see Tedisco dragging this out too long for two reasons:
(a) there's no benefit to keeping one more democrat out of the house and
(b) unlike Coleman, Tedisco still has a political career to think about. He's in the State house and was the minority leader. I can't see him allowing himself to be a laughing stock when he still wants to be in the republican state leadership.
April 16, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
How does NY law work? Can Tedisco contest the results and stop Murphy from taking office as has been done in MN?
April 16, 2009 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think we're going to see a MN style disaster in NY-20. My understanding is once the results are final, the winner is seated. Besides, there is no filibuster threat in the House or Representatives like there is in the Senate.
And once someone is seated, its hell to pay to get the court system to unseat them later.
But, just to make sure, I've contacted the NY Board of Elections asking them that very question.
No word back yet. We'll see.
April 16, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
In Illinois if I remember correctly if the margin of victory when all the ballots are counted is less than half a percent then the loser is entitled to a recount he or she pays for. Otherwise no recount is allowed. How does it work in NY?
April 16, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that paradigm holds in NY-20. This is only one small congressional district. Not a state-wide race.
Everything should be machine counts unless they are paper absentees in NY-20. The canvassing and re-canvassing that is going on right now, as well as the agonizingly slow process of counting the paper absentees, serves the same purpose as a recount anyway.
I believe the way this will work, is, once the counties report their final numbers, and challenged ballots have been resolved (which should be sometime next week), unless it is an exact tie, a winner will be declared, a certificate of some sort issued, and the winner seated in the House of Representatives.
Unless someone concedes first.
I don't think one of the candidates can hold up seating the declared winner by ballot count, endlessly, forever and ever, through court battles, like they can in MN. Whoever came up with those laws in MN, needs serious mental help.
But again, I've asked the right questions to the BOE in NY. We'll see how they respond (if they do).
April 16, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do they have provisional ballots in NY? Could those cause some delay until they are resolved?
April 16, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have heard absolutely nothing about any issues surrounding provisional ballots. Only machine counts and absentees ballots exist as far as I know.
Doesn't mean anything, however. Maybe the info is out there, and I've just been too stupid to stumble over it yet.
April 16, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is very good news. However, I am causious, with 1,200 more votes to be counted it still could go either way. I pray that Murphy wins, we need a young man of his caliber to be in the house--the old lawmakers are just not ready for the change this country needs, lets tell it like it is. It is time for the new generation to take the reins of power in this country and I think that is what is happening slowly but surely.
April 16, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not really. Now that we have solid numbers to look at, and at least an educated guess at how many contested ballots there are (and who contested what; plus judicial ruling in place) we can extrapolate.
It looks like almost all contested ballots everywhere, except perhaps Saratoga county, came from the Tedisco camp. Take Columbia for instance. As the author of the above article states, of 250 or so contested ballots there (a Murphy stronghold), only 22 came from Murphy. The rest came from Tedisco.
So, going with the assumption that a challenged ballot by one side, is probably a vote for the other, etc.
Even if all challenged ballot everywhere are a push (as "Overreach This" suggested earlier) Murphy still wins the absentee battle big; putting him over the top.
Bottom Line: When all is said and done, Murphy should come out on top in this election by somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 votes or so.
I hear you. Its not over till its over. But, its damn close.
April 16, 2009 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The interesting thing to me is that, other than 'saving face', this will have no bearing on the outcome of legislative issues in this Congress. Democrats are not likely to lose anything by one vote in the House. And yet, Repubs may be willing to pump in lots of money to string this thing out. For what? Money that can't go to shore up 2010 R candidates? I'm all for that.
They have lost the MN senate race, and it looks like they are going to lose this race.
I think that we see them pushed out to the edge, but they see themselves with a 2010 abyss opening up at their feet.
OT- OK Sen. Tom Coburn-R may retire rather than seek re-election in 2010. A long term stint in a fewer than 40 votes minority party would really sux. Welcome to the abyss, guys.
April 16, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. However, consider:
1. At some point, the Republicans have to start turning the tide where it counts. In elections. If they can't, they can't. But they targeted NY-20 as the start of that process. And two months ago, Tedisco was up 20+ points in the polls. It SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SLAM DUNK!! A setback here would be devastating psychologically.
2. If NY-20 does not come in for Tedisco, after everything the Republicans did to win, money, time, heavy hitters supporting Tedisco, etc etc. M. Steele visiting the district personally 3-4 times, then Steele is toast. He'll be blamed. Will he still be RNC chair? Maybe. We'll see. I'd lay 50-50 odds he's eventually eased out somehow.
3. Finally, this is not about money. There will always be money. On some level. Its about eating into Obama's approval rating. A win in NY-20 could have been used nationally as a rejection of Obama's activist policies. If the Republicans lose here, the reverse case can be made. Ouch!!!!!!
For the above three reasons, NY-20 is a HUGE election.
April 16, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
We could see this scenario repeat itself. An increasing number of voters either vote early or vote by absentee ballot, saving that trip to the election booth. Case in point: My mother (74) and step-father (85). Though they're both in good health, it's been years since they've stepped into a voting booth. In CA, they always voted absentee. In TX, they do either vote absentee or early, especially as my step-father needs help reading the ballot.
April 16, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
As one of the obsessive followers of the recount in Minnesota can attest, the rethugs engage in a pre-emptive war against the system knowing they will lose. Like Coleman's effort, it begins with frivolously challenging ballots and vetoing the inclusion of improperly rejected ballots. Then they can have their partisan hacks spew that their guy "won the original count, the recount and the recount of the recount." Never mind that none of the partial counts COUNT! Meanwhile, they will disparage your election workers, attack your election law as being hopeless and blame the counties for "not applying a uniform standard." Maybe they will try to stage a Brookes' Bros. riot in NY as they did in FLA 2000. You have to stay on top of these crooks or they will steal the seat right out from under your duly elected representative. ($12 million later, MN still has only one senator.) Croynin's middle name is "delay."
April 16, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. The problem has been, in the past, when the Republican Legal shock troops arrived in state or in district, early and in force, the Democrats had no answer.
That has changed. Now, Democratic legal shock troops and emergency legal contact teams are every bit as aggressive and pervasive are they are on the Republican side.
Perhaps even more so. Due to recent events, the Democrats have more resources to pull from than the Republicans do (for a change). And the Republicans are demoralized from their recent massive string of failures. Making it easier to steam roll them simply from an energy perspective.
In short, the Democrats have learned from their mistakes (see Gore v. Bush 2000). And now have legal teams on the ground, months in advance.
About time.
April 17, 2009 6:05 AM | Reply | Permalink